Model 3 UK orders.
Discussion
ZesPak said:
SWoll said:
I don't believe for a second it'll get any kind of approval for use in the next 10 years personally. A handful of accidents and that'll be the end of it. Useless until all cars on the road are using it and communicating with each other, and even then there are daft pedestrans/cyclists etc. to worry about..
I don't agree.It doesn't need to be perfect, it just needs to be better than humans, so the bar is pretty low.
Insurance over here have already started giving discounts on Teslas with FSD.
If the numbers hold up, soon you'll be mad to get a car without it.
Airbags, seatbelts, abs, none of them are perfect (a part from ABS), but if they are proven to get accidents/mortality down, they'll become mandatory on new cars.
If a car f
ks up, think of the legal issues the company who makes it will have. It’ll be chaos. Lawsuits for tesla et all in the thousands surely. ZesPak said:
I don't agree.
It doesn't need to be perfect, it just needs to be better than humans, so the bar is pretty low.
Insurance over here have already started giving discounts on Teslas with FSD.
If the numbers hold up, soon you'll be mad to get a car without it.
Airbags, seatbelts, abs, none of them are perfect (a part from ABS), but if they are proven to get accidents/mortality down, they'll become mandatory on new cars.
It needs to be better than the average human driver, and that's a much higher bar than you seem to appreciate IMHO.It doesn't need to be perfect, it just needs to be better than humans, so the bar is pretty low.
Insurance over here have already started giving discounts on Teslas with FSD.
If the numbers hold up, soon you'll be mad to get a car without it.
Airbags, seatbelts, abs, none of them are perfect (a part from ABS), but if they are proven to get accidents/mortality down, they'll become mandatory on new cars.
Why would insurance companies give a discount for an optional function? Even if you have FSD there's nothing forcing you to use it? Very odd.
ZesPak said:
SWoll said:
Why would insurance companies give a discount for an optional function? Even if you have FSD there's nothing forcing you to use it? Very odd.
I don't know. Saves me 300 EUR/year, not enough to offset the cost but better than nothing.ZesPak said:
SWoll said:
Why would insurance companies give a discount for an optional function? Even if you have FSD there's nothing forcing you to use it? Very odd.
I don't know. Saves me 300 EUR/year, not enough to offset the cost but better than nothing.
p1stonhead said:
But a human being blamed means they get held responsible, banned, points, prison etc.
If a car fks up, think of the legal issues the company who makes it will have. It’ll be chaos. Lawsuits for tesla et all in the thousands surely.
This. Liability will be one of the main issues against FSD. There is no way Tesla or any other car manufacturer can accept liability for every single driver.If a car f
ks up, think of the legal issues the company who makes it will have. It’ll be chaos. Lawsuits for tesla et all in the thousands surely. Part of FSD is Smart Summon, and it is pretty bad. If that's where we at with FSD, I agree we are probably 10 years away.
But I think other manufacturers like Waymo could start leading this field.
Witchfinder said:
Liability will always be with the person "in charge" of the vehicle, ie: the key holder for persons sat in the car, or the person who initiated the journey if the car has no people aboard.
So you can get blamed if your car kills someone whilst in self drive mode?Who would ever turn it on then?
I think I’d rather kill someone by my own actions and take responsibility for it than be blamed for my car killing someone whilst I was sitting in it but letting it do it’s thing!
p1stonhead said:
Witchfinder said:
Liability will always be with the person "in charge" of the vehicle, ie: the key holder for persons sat in the car, or the person who initiated the journey if the car has no people aboard.
So you can get blamed if your car kills someone whilst in self drive mode?Who would ever turn it on then?
I think I’d rather kill someone by my own actions and take responsibility for it than be blamed for my car killing someone whilst I was sitting in it but letting it do it’s thing!
SWoll said:
p1stonhead said:
Witchfinder said:
Liability will always be with the person "in charge" of the vehicle, ie: the key holder for persons sat in the car, or the person who initiated the journey if the car has no people aboard.
So you can get blamed if your car kills someone whilst in self drive mode?Who would ever turn it on then?
I think I’d rather kill someone by my own actions and take responsibility for it than be blamed for my car killing someone whilst I was sitting in it but letting it do it’s thing!
I don’t actually ever see FULL self drive happening to be honest. Autopilot I reckon is as far as itll go.
Do you reckon we will actually be able to call up an automated taxi? And who is responsible for that if it crashes and there’s a punter in the back?
Dave Hedgehog said:
so 19 years to get back the cost of FSD and just hope you dont buy another tesla in that time
like I said, it's not the reason I got it.I'm probably one of the few who really likes what AP has to offer at this point.
It actually took an exit the other day I was bound to drive past, a little scary but saved me being 20 minutes late.
Most of my daily trip is on the motorway, and I can effectively do almost absolutely nothing now. Just indicate every now and then. Really stress free.
Looking forward to my 1 hour drive home later today.
SWoll said:
ZesPak said:
I don't agree.
It doesn't need to be perfect, it just needs to be better than humans, so the bar is pretty low.
Insurance over here have already started giving discounts on Teslas with FSD.
If the numbers hold up, soon you'll be mad to get a car without it.
Airbags, seatbelts, abs, none of them are perfect (a part from ABS), but if they are proven to get accidents/mortality down, they'll become mandatory on new cars.
It needs to be better than the average human driver, and that's a much higher bar than you seem to appreciate IMHO.It doesn't need to be perfect, it just needs to be better than humans, so the bar is pretty low.
Insurance over here have already started giving discounts on Teslas with FSD.
If the numbers hold up, soon you'll be mad to get a car without it.
Airbags, seatbelts, abs, none of them are perfect (a part from ABS), but if they are proven to get accidents/mortality down, they'll become mandatory on new cars.
Why would insurance companies give a discount for an optional function? Even if you have FSD there's nothing forcing you to use it? Very odd.
I had an S2000 with the optional hardtop (so an S2000 GT). Was £300 a year cheaper on insurance, despite the fact that the hardtop was removable.... I guess the logic, so to speak, is that if you have a hardtop, or indeed FSD, you will use it for some of those 365 days.
p1stonhead said:
Witchfinder said:
Liability will always be with the person "in charge" of the vehicle, ie: the key holder for persons sat in the car, or the person who initiated the journey if the car has no people aboard.
So you can get blamed if your car kills someone whilst in self drive mode?Who would ever turn it on then?
I think I’d rather kill someone by my own actions and take responsibility for it than be blamed for my car killing someone whilst I was sitting in it but letting it do it’s thing!
Witchfinder said:
p1stonhead said:
Witchfinder said:
Liability will always be with the person "in charge" of the vehicle, ie: the key holder for persons sat in the car, or the person who initiated the journey if the car has no people aboard.
So you can get blamed if your car kills someone whilst in self drive mode?Who would ever turn it on then?
I think I’d rather kill someone by my own actions and take responsibility for it than be blamed for my car killing someone whilst I was sitting in it but letting it do it’s thing!
Genuine question is seems impossibly complicated to me.
RobDickinson said:
Level 4/5 has to be the manufacturers responsibility.
Yes they will have accidents and even kill people but at a far lower rate and each time they'll get improved and fixed so itsv far less likely to happen.
Humans on the whole are not improving at all at driving.
I can’t see a regulator or insurance company in the world allowing self driving cars kill people however the odds play out. That’s not to say a self driving car won’t be in accidents, but if it was a failing of the software that resulted in the accident it would be halted immediately. Can you think of any other example anywhere where computerised systems are allowed to make life changing mistakes? Trains... no. Planes no. Elevators...no Any safety interlock.. no. Traffic lights no. Yes they will have accidents and even kill people but at a far lower rate and each time they'll get improved and fixed so itsv far less likely to happen.
Humans on the whole are not improving at all at driving.
Heres Johnny said:
RobDickinson said:
Level 4/5 has to be the manufacturers responsibility.
Yes they will have accidents and even kill people but at a far lower rate and each time they'll get improved and fixed so itsv far less likely to happen.
Humans on the whole are not improving at all at driving.
I can’t see a regulator or insurance company in the world allowing self driving cars kill people however the odds play out. That’s not to say a self driving car won’t be in accidents, but if it was a failing of the software that resulted in the accident it would be halted immediately. Can you think of any other example anywhere where computerised systems are allowed to make life changing mistakes? Trains... no. Planes no. Elevators...no Any safety interlock.. no. Traffic lights no. Yes they will have accidents and even kill people but at a far lower rate and each time they'll get improved and fixed so itsv far less likely to happen.
Humans on the whole are not improving at all at driving.
What if they had to go down a dark rainy English country lane, then meet another car. Will they reverse backwards and pull into a muddy lay-by to let someone pass?
I honestly don’t see how people expect them to work. Perhaps in a grid city like NYC as people say, but no way here. We don’t have any straight roads like the US does.
Dave Hedgehog said:
Their pricing gives the impression they are running some sort of algorithm that looks at stock levels, orders, exchange rates and probably a whole host of other costs and just changes the price when set conditions are triggered, it would be a novel way to price cars but on the whole better than traditional method of having stupidly high list prices and then trying to see how little of that price you can stop the buyer from negotiating down
From a consumer perspective I don't really see this as an advantage. OK, Tesla is more transparent as there's no discount. But for the established brands you just have to invest 10 minutes on the internet (car brokers, new car listings) to figure out the street price. No big deal. Problem with Tesla IMO is the total lack of predictability. One day you can get silver wheels, the other not and the car is suddenly €1k more expensive. But that's nothing compared to e.g. the poor peeps that ordered e.g. a white M3P early this year (EU markets). Up comes the next quarter and the expensive option colour suddenly is free and the base car drops *€10k* in price over night. Lots of pixxed off early adopters over here...
Dave Hedgehog said:
it would be interesting to know if it still did this if you have selected no to the two GDPR data recording options in the menu
Not sure if this matters really. IMO they have all the data they need, it's not like throwing any more input at their current AI is going to make things any better. Else we'd see some real progress. Gassing Station | Tesla | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff